Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

'inner_boundary_index' referenced before assignment #622

Closed
RachelLosacco opened this issue Jul 12, 2016 · 5 comments
Closed

'inner_boundary_index' referenced before assignment #622

RachelLosacco opened this issue Jul 12, 2016 · 5 comments

Comments

@RachelLosacco
Copy link

This run uses model/structure/type/specific and model/abundances/type/file.

Here is the pastebin with my terminal commands and full error.
Here is the pastebin with my .yml configuration file.
Here is the pastebin with the abundances file.

It might not be a good idea to have a file type for abundances and type:specific for the structure. The error could stem from the astrophysics side more so than the programming aspect, but I would like to know why this is not working.

@yeganer
Copy link
Contributor

yeganer commented Jul 12, 2016

I think you are missing shell 0

@ftsamis
Copy link
Member

ftsamis commented Jul 12, 2016

I think that the combination of abundances.type=file and structure.type=specific will always end up on this error (with the current code). This is because the variables inner_boundary_index and outer_boundary_index are only assigned in the structure_section['type'] == 'file' case, but are accessed anyway in the abundances_section['type'] == 'file' case (io/config_reader.py).

@RachelLosacco
Copy link
Author

The example abundance file(s) show it beginning with 1.

@ftsamis I think you're right. It also makes sense that a set up with varying abundances should not have a constant density and velocity.

@unoebauer
Copy link
Contributor

True - physically it may not be very meaningful but it could be a useful setup for test calculations. In any case, I'd suggest to add a check which informs the user that the selected combination is currently not supported.

@ftsamis
Copy link
Member

ftsamis commented Dec 24, 2016

This issue has probably become irrelevant after #652 was merged.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants